Atheism and moral nihilism

[PorcelinaV]

Would you agree that atheism / naturalism has a less solid basis on which to ground morality?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/mar/09/life-without-god-bleak-atheism

Even more disturbing, perhaps, is the threat of moral nihilism. Atheists are quite rightly keen to counter the accusation that life without God cannot be moral. The British Humanist Association, for instance, claims that "Right and wrong can be explained by human nature alone and do not require religious teaching". But, just as with happiness, there is a need to distinguish the possibility of atheist morality from its inevitable actuality. Anyone who thinks it's easy to ground ethics either hasn't done much moral philosophy or wasn't concentrating when they did. Although morality is arguably just as murky for the religious, at least there is some bedrock belief that gives a reason to believe that morality is real and will prevail. In an atheist universe, morality can be rejected without external sanction at any point, and without a clear, compelling reason to believe in its reality, that's exactly what will sometimes happen.So I think it's time we atheists 'fessed up and admitted that life without God can sometimes be pretty grim.

When bad things happen, I think logically, and act practically by doing my best to take matters into my own hands, rather than relying on ‘hope’ or a fictional being. I also take solace in my friends and family. A bad situation will happen regardless of whether you believe or don’t believe in god.

@MariaVT65,

"When bad things happen, I think logically, and act practically by doing my best to take matters into my own hands, rather than relying on ‘hope’ or a fictional being. I also take solace in my friends and family. A bad situation will happen regardless of whether you believe or don’t believe in god."

In the absence of any firm solutions or good advice from anyone what do you do? As I say I have hope through my faith and this has been necessary in the situations I have been in. How would you stop the panic?

You're misinterpreting us here. We do not feel that as atheists we are inherently good. We feel that we are as capable of being good as someone who has a faith. It really is that simple.

I can't speak for other atheists, but I don't feel the need for a deity when life gets tough. I accept that bad things will happen and when they do (as they have) I strive to come through to the other side, retain my kindness and humanity and learn from them. What does not kill you (speaking from experience here) really does make you stronger. Also, no matter how bad things are, there is always goodness and kindness somewhere in the world. It's about opening your eyes and seeing what you do still have rather than focusing on what you might have lost. It's not always easy, but then neither is dealing with hard times when you have faith. Ultimately I believe that people are more good than bad. I have yet to be proved wrong, despite having been through some really awful things. I deal with them by passing on what I have learned to other people who are now in the same place where I was then. You seem to believe in the old 'no atheists in foxholes' trope - I can tell you now that it is nonsense.

And hope, I feel, doesn't preclude taking matters into one's own hands. I think it can encourage action even if by all outwards appearances it would seem pointless.

"Also, no matter how bad things are, there is always goodness and kindness somewhere in the world."

@pointythings, to me, from my perspective, that goodness and kindness is God manifesting, in people, in nature. I associate God with goodness. So essentially, from my perspective, that is what you are seeing. That doesn't make me appreciate people any less, it is the opposite. I feel truly honoured when I come across goodness and kindness.

"You seem to believe in the old 'no atheists in foxholes' trope - I can tell you now that it is nonsense."

I don't particularly. My point is more that in that situation my faith would give me hope. I was asking atheists where they find there's.

And your answer seems to be in similar things/aspects of life to me. The exception is that I see those things as a physical manifestation of something more spiritual, that is God. I am simply joining the dots of that goodness.

And in joining the dots of goodness I feel connection to the world and people and all things really. 🙂

If you’re referring to bad situations that are permanent, eg a relatives death or a chronic illness, then you manage the best you can. It sometimes needs to be about ‘acceptance’ rather than ‘hope’. Again for me, that is being practical. It doesn’t make more miserable to know that i won’t see deceased loved ones again because I accept that I won’t, but I feel by giving myself false hope that I will see them again even worse.

To put the question back you then, why do you feel better about things by believing in god? If you were to be diagnosed with a permanent health condition for example, why does believing in god help? It won’t suddenly make you recover from your illness.

Does it really make a difference? If we assume an atheist and a theist wrestling with the same moral dilemma, both in good faith and with humility, wouldn’t both have to concede that they reach a point where they don’t really know what the ‘right’ course of action would be ? For the religious person, could they honestly say they know God’s will? Surely the nature of faith is that they don’t actually know for certain? They, reflect, pray, seek guidance in scripture etc.
Without good faith and humility, maybe that’s when we end up with moral nihilism, or cynicism?

"but I feel by giving myself false hope that I will see them again even worse."

@MariaVT65 I don't believe that hope is false though.

"To put the question back you then, why do you feel better about things by believing in god? If you were to be diagnosed with a permanent health condition for example, why does believing in god help? It won’t suddenly make you recover from your illness."

I have come very close to this. I have had treatment for several cancerous tumours several years ago. My faith did help me. You talk about acceptance - I found not accepting that is was the end for me gave me strength and helped me navigate my way through the treatment options. On one occasion I even had a dream full of religious imagery which gave me the strength to refuse one particular and gruelling treatment against medical advice which has turned out to be not a bad decision since I'm still here many years later. Not saying my choices are something everyone should take, bodies are individuals living in different conditions.

@heyhohello
I understand that you use your faith as an emotional support in time of difficulties and as that works for you that is fine
I'm not sure why you don't understand why some other people don't need faith to get through problems? Thete are many different survival mechanisms people use, and I don't need the writings of men from thousands of years ago to be my only guide.
Thete is an odd perception from some theists that the lives of atheists must be empty and meaningless. I gain huge satisfaction from my family, from singing, from reading, from doing a good job, from doing the odd 'good deed'. I still believe that when I die my existence ends completely, but why would that worry me?

I mean ok, but that’s not really the example I was thinking of. A person can make decisions about a medical issue regardless of whether they believe in god. An atheist could have made your decision too. I’m taking about more permanent issues, such as the death of a loved one. I know several religious people who have faith as they need to believe they will see their loved ones again. This is where I bring the ‘false hope’ in. I accept i will never see loved ones again. And it’s painful, but I don’t see much benefit in believing in something that doesn’t exist.

There seems to a general opinion on this thread that atheists can’t make valid decisions by themselves (whether it be moral decisions or decisions during difficult times) without the help of a god. It’s utter rubbish and quite insulting.

I once attended a church service after being invited by 2 religious friends while I was living abroad. During the service, they talked about how everyone has free will and god doesn’t influence actions. At the end of the service, they prayed to god asking them to help them think of ways to help residents of a country that had just had a natural disaster. I asked my friends about this afterwards, saying I don’t understand how you say god can’t influence your actions, but you also want help with how to help others. They couldn’t answer me. I take more comfort in being realistic rather than idealistic. I donate to charities for example because i believe in helping others, not because a religion tells me to, and I certainly don’t need help from a god to tell me the best way to help.

@heyhohello so we atheists are not so different from you in one sense; we just don't feel the need to ascribe the things that give us hope to a deity. To us, they are just there and that is fine. We are able to connect to the world around us without joining the dots.

MariaVT65 in your example of the friends praying for ideas in church, isn't that like starting a mumsnet thread? By starting a thread I'm asking someone else to give me ideas to help, but they are not taking away my free will to accept or ignore those ideas!

For me, this raises more questions than it answers. What does it mean to be a "good person"? What do we mean by "evil"? Are these objective realities or purely subjective concepts?

@Iggi999
i think you’re right about that.
i think there’s a distinction to be made between different things that faith offers. Posters have talked about consolation and practical guidance, but aren’t these both different from knowing what is morally right in a given situation?
I think praying and talking about how to provide support to a country affected by a disaster is something different to praying and talking about why we should focus on this disaster and not another, or who in the affected country we should prioritise - or even whether it’s right to break the law in order to help them.
I think sometimes faith-based answers are informed by a religious tradition or moral code that is instrumentally useful; but sometimes it leads to, at worst, some obscene outcomes.

I totally get what you’re saying but for me it’s slightly different. They were literally saying in the service that ‘god can’t influence people’s actions’, and then they were asking him to influence their actions. Maybe slightly different from the principle of free will and needed more clarity in the service.

My impression is that they talk about us having free will so we can’t blame god on our bad actions eg murder, but he can still influence our good actions. Idealistic.

When I start a mumsent thread, i am acknowledging that people can influence my actions and that is why I am asking for advice.

For me, that whole evening just cemented my impression that there isn’t a full understanding of what god is supposed to be in relation to humans. (Probably because it is up to interpretation of some old scriptures and god doesn’t exist). I just find it all idealistic.

@Iggi999 the question of good and evil is complicated. I mean, some things are objectively evil: rape, murder, theft, domestic violence of all kinds. Religion layers a tier of complication on top: sex outside marriage is evil (why?), same sex relationships are evil (why?), people who don't subscribe to your flavour of the faith may not be evil, but they are certainly going to Hell after they die. It's that part of it that I refuse to accept as an atheist because it's bullshit.

As an atheist I cringe at the arrogance of dismissing people’s faith as ‘bullshit’.

I think we atheists often miss the point. Sure, we can chase God into ever tighter gaps until he disappears, but what does tut achieve rather than to reassure us of our own cleverness?

I consider myself privileged to have in my life people who believe, and whose belief is for them is a constant question and a reminder of the need to be humble , because we don’t know very much in the great scheme of things.

Id much rather spend time with those people than a bunch of atheists who are constantly patting themselves on the back because they went to Oxford and work at the BBC.

I'm a theist and I don't think either same sex relationships or sex outside marriage are evil. Belief in God doesn't necessitate those beliefs!
But I'm less sure about being able to clearly say certain things are objectively evil - killing someone is wrong, but killing someone to stop a greater evil - is that right? (Would it be wrong if you could go back in time and kill Hitler?)
If you have a consequentialist approach to morality then almost anything could be justified if it leads to a good outcome.

I consider myself privileged to have in my life people who believe, and whose belief is for them is a constant question and a reminder of the need to be humble

Unfortunately there's also lot of religious folk who are anything but humble!
And there are atheists - perhaps the ones I come across are not so much the 'Oxford/BBC' type - who well understand that we (humanity in general as well as atheists) don't have all the answers. The pursuit of science requires that humility, it's all about keeping on asking questions!

Unfortunately there's also lot of religious folk who are anything but humble!

Of course, no argument form me there. I’d ask whether/how far the scientific method provides answers to moral questions, or gives meaning to our lives? I can see how it would provide certain types of explanations for behaviour or belief, or allows us to contribute to society in many ways. But is that the same thing.

also, you might be a very good scientist and contribute hugely to the world, but still be cynical and arrogant.

But I didn't dismiss people's faith as bullshit. I dismissed the obsession with human sexual behaviour and the oppression of women as bullshit. If you don't think it is, then that's a problem. Why should I respect those aspects of faith which most affect me as a woman and my children who are all some form of not heterosexual? Why should I respect people who believe that I am lesser because I am female, and that my children are lesser because they are not straight? That is not a moral position deserving of anything but respect.

It's also not a moral position shared by everyone who has a faith. There are very many people in my life who believe, and none of them accept this - going to say it again - bullshit.

Of course there are complexities. The question of going back in time to kill Hitler is always an interesting one. Speaking for myself - I wouldn't. We don't know enough about the mechanics of time and causality and the risks could be huge. There's some excellent fiction on the topic too: Stephen King's 11.22.63 tackles the subject, as does Ray Bradbury's Sound Thunder in much shorter form.

As for killing someone to stop a greater evil - well, that's playing itself out in the Middle East, isn't it? And my position there is that neither side can claim to be righteous.

"I totally get what you’re saying but for me it’s slightly different. They were literally saying in the service that ‘god can’t influence people’s actions’, and then they were asking him to influence their actions. Maybe slightly different from the principle of free will and needed more clarity in the service."

@MariaVT65, their belief, as Christians, seems strange to me. I do believe God can influence actions....it's sort of the whole point. For example, in scripture, James links Faith and deeds at length. Basically if you believe something strongly enough you will act accordingly it will affect you. If you don't act according to deep felt beliefs you either are a hypocrite or will feel regret or frustration.

"I mean ok, but that’s not really the example I was thinking of. A person can make decisions about a medical issue regardless of whether they believe in god. An atheist could have made your decision too. I’m taking about more permanent issues, such as the death of a loved one. I know several religious people who have faith as they need to believe they will see their loved ones again. This is where I bring the ‘false hope’ in. I accept i will never see loved ones again. And it’s painful, but I don’t see much benefit in believing in something that doesn’t exist."

However, you must accept decisions often (most usually) have to be made which involve some degree of risk. So how do you decide to 'bet on the odds'? Do you simply follow advice? Or look at statistics? What about when there is a gap in research? None of the statistics match very well to your individual case? Do we just take a chance or draw upon some other insight? I felt my faith gave me an insight - there was a gap in the research with regards to my case it turned out. Although I only knew that after my decision was made in the discussion which followed. But had I simply accepted advice I would not have known.

And regarding the benefit of believing in something that 'does not exist', the benefit lies beyond physical existence. It is in precognition and life beyond physical death which reaches into physical existence and manifests into the present.

I think you’re right, in that there are some aspects of religious dogma that strike us as wrong in 2023. There are lots of relics from earlier times that are retained in religions, which might be perfectly rationally explained - even if we don’t like the explanations and they’re not relevant now. There are other parts that are very allegorical, which contain valuable wisdom. unless a religious person is a literalist, contending with those tensions is surely part of the practice of faith?
One thing that faith does is place us in a community with a history, where the big questions of life and meaning and morality are constantly reinterpreted and updated.
The risk of atheism , to my mind, is that it places us as individuals, outside of time and community - and maybe that’s where the OP’s question about moral nihilism comes in. I don’t really think that many atheists think a lot about the moral, rather than the scientific of social, implications of our atheism. Not in the way a Dostoevsky or a Nietzsche or a Camus does. If one is to think about God, as a person of faith, those questions might be more present.